In the United States, Independent Service Operators (“ISOs”) and/or their affiliates, which include Energy Curtailment Service Providers (“ECSPs” or CSPs or Aggregators), utility companies, electrical power producers that are the primary source of electrical power supplied over an electrical power grid by the utility companies, etc., are under continuing pressure to reduce demand for electrical power (“kilowatt (“KW”) demand”) by customers (“end users”). The reasons for reducing demand include stabilizing the power grid so that electrical power may be reliably supplied to end users, thereby avoiding brownouts or possibly blackouts. In addition, there are economic reasons to reduce demand, which include an ISO or utility company having the ability to purchase wholesale electricity for supply over the power grid from the power producers at a reasonable price. As demand for electricity increases, the wholesale price for electricity typically increases. In the event the wholesale price for electricity exceeds certain thresholds, the ISOs and/or utility companies seek to decrease KW demand from end users to maintain the price at which the electrical power can be purchased from the power producers at reasonable levels.
When the ISOs and/or utilities determine, such as for one or more of the reasons discussed above, that there is a need to reduce KW demand during a specified time period, an energy demand curtailment strategy is pursued in the form of an energy demand curtailment event. At this time, the ISOs and/or utilities typically send an email to their ECSPs requesting that KW demand be reduced during the time period, in accordance with the demand curtailment strategies associated with the event. There may be various types of energy demand curtailment events, and the objectives of energy demand curtailment for each may differ. For ease of reference, these events for reducing KW demand at end users are referred to herein as demand response events or DR events. Following receipt of the email including the requesting for KW demand reduction from the ISOs and/or the utilities, which ordinarily identifies the DR event and its demand reduction objectives, the ECSPs, in turn, transmit an email or a facsimile to, or call by telephone, end users of the utilities who have entered into demand response agreements (“DR Agreements”) with the ISOs, the utility companies and/or the ECSPs to reduce KW demand during a DR event. These DR Agreements set forth the amount of electrical load to be reduced, and when such load will be reduced, for a DR event(s) by the respective end users. The end users, who, for example, may be the owner of a building or store(s), are paid a monetary incentive to reduce KW demand in accordance with the terms of the DR Agreement. The monetary incentive, which may vary from state to state and for each ISO, utility company and/or ECSP, may provide that the end user is paid a certain sum by the ISO, utility company and/or ECSP for every kilowatt demand of electricity the end user reduced during a DR event. Alternatively, the end user may receive a discount from the ISO, utility company and/or ECSP on electricity usage rate in Kilowatt Hours (“KwH”), based on the end user reducing demand by an agreed upon amount during a DR event. For example, if the end user normally pays $0.17/KwH, the end user would pay $0.12/KwH if the end user reduces KW demand during the DR events covered under the DR Agreement.
The terms of DR Agreements to reduce KW demand, for example, may depend upon the geographic location of the end users being served by the power grid. On the east coast of the United States, the utility companies are typically deregulated, and ISOs or RTOs, such as the PJM Interconnection grid that serves Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia, have agreements directly with ECSPs, and not end users, to reduce specified amounts of KW demand in the event of a DR event. These ECSPs, in turn, have DR Agreements with end users for the end users to reduce and/or eliminate KW Demand during a DR event.
Also, currently on the west coast of the United States, such as California where the utility companies are regulated, CASIO (California Independent Service Operator or California “ISO”) operates in conjunction with the three (3) major California utility companies (San Diego Gas and Electric, Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric) to manage the electrical power grid in that geographic region. These utilities have DR agreements to curtail energy demand directly with end users and ECSPs (also known in California as Aggregators). Alternatively, the utilities may have agreements with ECSPs, and the ECSPs have DR Agreements with the end users.
The current technique of end users reducing KW demand pursuant to such DR Agreements, however, depends too much upon human involvement to implement actions to achieve the agreed upon demand reduction for the DR event at the end users. There are inherent weaknesses in the current technique, because the implementation of demand reduction for a DR event depends on a human responding to an email, fax or telephone call from an ISO, utility and/or ECSPs that provides notification of a request for demand reduction at the end user for a DR event. Although some requests for energy demand curtailment for some DR events permit hours to respond, the more critical ones, and usually most lucrative to the end users, may require a response within 10 minutes or less. The necessity for a human being involved in response efforts to reduce KW demand for a DR event is problematic for the following reasons:
1) Humans do not necessarily sit by their computers waiting for “that email” to show up, or by their fax machines waiting for “that fax” to show up. By the time a human sees and reads “that email” or “that fax,” there may be little or no time to implement a response at an end user, as required for the DR event under a DR Agreement. In addition, in current office environments humans use fax machines much less than emails, which further decreases the chance of a timely response for a faxed request for demand reduction for a DR event.
2) During a DR event, certain geographic areas may already be experiencing brownouts and/or black outs, such that computers and fax machines at end users may already be inoperative when a request notification is transmitted by email or facsimile. Consequently, the human (operator) responsible to implementing demand reduction at the end user to comply with the DR Agreement never receives “that call” or “that fax.”
3) Humans do not necessarily sit by their office telephones waiting for “that phone call” to come. By the time they return to their desk and listen to their voice mails, there may be little or no time to respond.
4) Humans do not necessarily carry their cell phones, PDAs or other type of communication device with them at all times or, if they do, the devices may be on “vibrate.” Consequently, when the request notification for energy curtailment is made, either via phone call or email, this request may be missed. In addition, by the time humans pick up their cell phone and/or PDA and listen to their voice mails or look at their emails, there may be little or no time to respond. Further, it is very common that cell phone and/or PDA coverage is bad in certain areas, such that humans may never get “that call” or “that email.” In addition, it is very common that cell phone and/or PDA batteries are low or dead, such that humans may never receive “that call” or “that email” until the batteries of such devices are recharged. By such time, the end user may have missed the time period in which a response to the DR event is required under the DR Agreement.
5) Humans go on vacations, get sick, are called out on emergencies, get into accidents, fall asleep, get distracted, have higher priorities, can only accomplish so many tasks at one time, etc. All these possibilities may prevent a call for energy curtailment from being acted upon in a timely manner.
6) Humans also make mistakes. Therefore, even if a call for energy curtailment is received, appropriate action by the recipient may not be timely implemented at the end user, such that the time period in which a response to the DR event is required under the DR Agreement may have been missed.
7) Humans do not have the ability to make complex mathematical calculations with a high degree of accuracy at all hours of the day. Consequently, it is highly likely that humans will not always make the proper decisions with respect to what actions to take and/or KW demand control actions to implement, and the order in which such actions are to be implemented, based upon a multitude of criteria that needs to be evaluated simultaneously and substantially instantaneously.
Thus, based on the typical human involvement in a response to a request for energy curtailment, DR events requiring implementation of demand reduction within a short period of time are not necessarily appropriately and timely responded to by end users.
The DR events in a DR Agreement may include a “day ahead” event, for which the end user agrees to reduce KW demand the day following receipt of a DR event request from, for example, the ECSP. A “day ahead” event may arise, for example, if in the opinion of the ISO, there might be a concern of a “brown out” or “black out” the very next day and/or the demand for electricity might place the ISO and/or utility company(s) at an economic disadvantage. Currently, in most states, ISOs typically send an email for a “day ahead” DR event to the ECSPs, who in turn send relay emails, faxes and/or make phone calls to end users a day in advance of the time period when demand reduction is to begin, and sometimes only 6-10 hours in advance. Assuming a human (operator) at the end user who is responsible to implement demand reduction actions for a DR event indeed receives the notification, the operator at the end user, for example, a commercial facility, may attempt to comply by quickly moving about the facility and manually turning off electric circuit breakers and/or disconnecting switches to electrical devices having larger electrical loads. These efforts are stressful, and the larger the physical size of the end user, the more difficult it is for the operator to perform such actions. For example, an end user facility may be so large that provisions of a DR Agreement for a DR event cannot be satisfied unless a very sophisticated building automation system(s) is already in place at the end user with demand reduction strategies already preprogrammed. Even in these circumstances, however, the operator at the facility still would have to manually activate this demand response system. Even if the aforementioned building automation system(s) is remotely activated by some means, the preprogrammed procedures may not be sophisticated enough to achieve the desired result or without inconveniencing building occupants.
In addition, the DR events in a DR Agreement may include a “day of” event, for which the end user agrees to reduce KW demand the day a request is received from the ECSP. A “day of” event may arise, if in the opinion of the ISO and/or utility company(s), there might be a concern of a “brown out” or “black out” on the day in question due to less available electricity from the grid than was expected the previous day. In other words, in the opinion of the ISO and/or utility company(s), the demand on the electric grid on the day in question may very well be greater than the supply of available electricity from the grid. This could occur, for example, because the temperature and humidity conditions on the day in question are higher than had been expected the day before; certain electric power producers had equipment malfunctions, etc. In addition, the “day of” event may arise because the ISO and/or utility company(s) are attempting to counteract a potential economic disadvantage of high demand and low supply with respect to their purchase of power from electrical power producers.
Although the monetary compensation that end users may receive for complying with a request for demand reduction for a “day of” DR event usually exceeds that associated with complying with a “day ahead” DR event, an end user usually has great difficulty in complying with demand reduction requirements of a “day of” DR event. For a “day of” DR event, KW demand reduction is usually required to begin at the end user within about 3 hours, and sometimes within 10 minutes or less, of the time of notice to the end user by a fax, an email or phone call from, for example, the ECSP. Consequently, most end users cannot comply with requirements of such DR event and do not include such a DR event in the DR Agreement. Typically, unless an end user has some sort of energy management system in place and can provide for demand reduction actions to be taken within very short periods of time, the end user does not include such DR events in the DR Agreement. In addition, although an end user having a very sophisticated building automation system(s) already in place with demand reduction strategies already preprogrammed may include such DR events in a DR Agreement, there are few of such end users and, those that do exist who attempt to manually activate such systems to reduce demand, more often than not are not able to respond quickly enough to provide for compliance with a “day of” DR event and, thus, fail, either partially or completely.
Further, when a request for demand reduction for a DR event is made to an end user, such as by email, fax or telephone, the end user itself is responsible to ensure reduction in electrical power consumption from the grid is achieved. Only after the monthly utility bills have been sent to the end user, and the ECSP has reviewed these bills for compliance with the terms of a DR Agreement does the utility compensate the end user for the energy demand curtailment. This compensation, thus, may occur as much as two to three months after the response by the end user to reduce demand load for a DR event.
Also, at an end user, the typical procedure to ensure a reduction in electricity consumption requires human involvement. A human operator monitors an electric meter(s) to confirm that demand reduction is occurring in accordance with the provisions of the DR Agreement for the DR event. This human involvement in monitoring does not permit a person (energy manager) at an end user, who is responsible for management of energy usage and demand load reduction activities, to have real time information on electric KW demand usage for the end user. In addition, although so called smart electrical power usage meters are known, such meters typically do not provide real time electric KW demand usage information to an end user or, for example, an ECSP with whom the end user has entered into a DR Agreement.
Also, the necessary involvement of humans (operators) to manually take actions to reduce demand loads makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for an end user to take advantage of real time pricing of electrical power. In a real time pricing program, which is currently offered only by a limited number of ISOs but will likely be offered by more ISOs in the future, an end user may desire to take action to reduce electrical demand if the electric rate during a given hour(s) during a 24 hour period exceeds the amount the end user is willing to pay (typically expressed in $/KWH). As the actions that need to be taken to reduce KW demand at the end user are manually implemented, it is difficult for the end user to reduce KW demand accordingly, such as in large or small amounts as needed, in real time, depending upon the real time electrical rate, in comparison to a threshold electrical rate above which the end user does not desire to pay for electrical power.
Further, some ISOs may desire, but typically are not able, to reduce significant end user loads directly from their operations, for example, to compensate for frequency modulations in the power grid distribution system. The typical technique of a human (operator) at an end user manually taking actions to reduce demand load does not permit for such direct demand reduction actions by the ISOs.
Also, ISOs, utility companies and/or ECSPs typically require that an end user have the capability of reducing at least about 100 KW-200 KW demand (which may vary from ISO to ISO, RTO to RTO, CSP to CSP or utility to utility) during a DR event, for the end user to become a party to a DR agreement. Typical residential homes, however, can reduce KW demand only by about 1-2 KW, and also many smaller commercial entities, such as standalone stores or factories, cannot reduce KW demand sufficiently to meet the requirements for becoming an end user party to a DR Agreement. Previously, some utilities have made attempts to aggregate thousands of residential homes, and reduce some KW demand by cycling the homeowner's central air conditioning compressors wirelessly during hot summer days when the grid is overtaxed. These efforts by utilities have met with some success, although the nominal financial incentives, such as $10 or so, that utilities may offer the homeowner for the entire cooling season does not provide much of an inducement for the homeowners to participate.
In addition, some utilities have undertaken more sophisticated measures to reduce KW demand, such as by installing “smart thermostats” that may provide an additional amount of KW reduction. In addition, wireless ZIGBEE devices (or equivalent) have been installed in residential homes by private companies who are partnered with certain utilities, which provide both the homeowner and the utility with access to electric KW demand usage for each homeowner and also provides the homeowner with rate information and KWH usage information. Homeowners, however, can opt out of DR events and/or not participate fully, such that, even though their initial intentions are admirable, the desired KW demand reduction sought is not achieved during a DR event.
Moreover, energy curtailment techniques have little concern for, and hence typically do not consider, human factors, such comfort or convenience. Although a homeowner initially may desire to maximize KW demand reduction, the discomfort associated with doing so, for example, the existence of higher temperatures in homes during DR events, the need to schedule use of electrical devices such as electric ovens around DR events, etc., ultimately proves intolerable, thereby causing many homeowners to abandon their demand reduction goals. Further, as discussed above, humans do not necessarily sit by their “smart thermostats” waiting for a DR event notification. By the time homeowners are actually notified of a DR event, there is little or no time to do anything about it except for possibly opting out of the DR event. As current demand reduction techniques do not include real provisions that may make homeowners and their occupants comfortable, homeowners many times simply opt out of the current DR event, next DR event or series of DR events.
Therefore, there exists a need for system and method for fully automated energy curtailment at end users, when an energy demand curtailment event arises, where human involvement is not required and undesirable impacts at the end users at which demand reduction actions are implemented are avoided.